SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

G.A.BRAHMA DEVA
Hindustan Lever Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.B. Shankara Narayana Rao,L. Narasimha Murthy

ORDER

Per G.A. Brahma Deva :

This is an appeal filed by the party. According to the Department, Modvat credit is not admissible since the party has taken credit on the Photostat copy of the authenticated invoice.

2. He said that during the relevant period, the party was entitled to take Modvat credit on authenticated copy in case original copy was lost. This factual position has been properly analysed by the Assistant Commissioner while allowing the Modvat credit. Being not satisfied with the Order passed by the AC, the department has filed an appeal against the Order passed by the Assistant Commissioner before the Collector (Appeals) which resulted in allowing the appeal against the party. The party has filed an appeal before the Tribunal against the said order of the Collector (Appeals). The Tribunal had remanded the matter to the Collector (Appeals) for reconsideration. The Collector (Appeals) during readjudication proceedings also held that Modvat credit is not admissible. Aggrieved by this Order, the party again filed appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Counsel drew my attention to the finding portion of the Tribunal while remanding the matter in para 4 of the Order and the s

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top